我只是遇到了这个问题，但在我的情况下思考这个问题给出了最好的解决方案，与预期的解决方案无关。

It could be quite a common case, basically, I'm reading from one source list and creating objects based on them in a destination list, however, I have to check whether the source items are valid first and want to return the row of any error. At first-glance, I want to get the index into the enumerator of the object at the Current property, however, as I am copying these elements, I implicitly know the current index anyway from the current destination. Obviously it depends on your destination object, but for me it was a List, and most likely it will implement ICollection.

i.e.

var destinationList = new List<someObject>();
foreach (var item in itemList)
{
  var stringArray = item.Split(new char[] { ';', ',' }, StringSplitOptions.RemoveEmptyEntries);

  if (stringArray.Length != 2)
  {
    //use the destinationList Count property to give us the index into the stringArray list
    throw new Exception("Item at row " + (destinationList.Count + 1) + " has a problem.");
  }
  else
  {
    destinationList.Add(new someObject() { Prop1 = stringArray[0], Prop2 = stringArray[1]});
  }
}

我认为，虽然不总是适用，但常常足以值得一提。

不管怎样，关键是有时在你的逻辑中已经有了一个不明显的解决方案……

我就是这么做的，这很简单，但如果你在循环body obj中做了很多。价值，它很快就会过时。

foreach(var obj in collection.Select((item, index) => new { Index = index, Value = item }) {
    string foo = string.Format("Something[{0}] = {1}", obj.Index, obj.Value);
    ...
}

使用计数器变量并没有什么错。事实上，无论使用for、foreach while还是do，计数器变量都必须在某处声明并递增。

所以，如果你不确定你是否有一个适当索引的集合，请使用这个习语:

var i = 0;
foreach (var e in collection) {
   // Do stuff with 'e' and 'i'
   i++;
}

否则，如果你知道你的可索引集合是O(1)索引访问(它将是数组和可能List<T>(文档没有说)，但不一定对其他类型(如LinkedList)):

// Hope the JIT compiler optimises read of the 'Count' property!
for (var i = 0; i < collection.Count; i++) {
   var e = collection[i];
   // Do stuff with 'e' and 'i'
}

它应该永远不需要通过调用MoveNext()和询问Current来“手动”操作IEnumerator - foreach是为你省去了那个特别的麻烦…如果您需要跳过项目，只需在循环体中使用continue。

为了完整起见，根据你对索引的处理(上面的结构提供了足够的灵活性)，你可以使用Parallel LINQ:

// First, filter 'e' based on 'i',
// then apply an action to remaining 'e'
collection
    .AsParallel()
    .Where((e,i) => /* filter with e,i */)
    .ForAll(e => { /* use e, but don't modify it */ });

// Using 'e' and 'i', produce a new collection,
// where each element incorporates 'i'
collection
    .AsParallel()
    .Select((e, i) => new MyWrapper(e, i));

我们使用上面的AsParallel()，因为现在已经是2014年了，我们希望充分利用这些多核来加快速度。此外，对于“顺序”LINQ，你只能在List<T>和Array…上获得ForEach()扩展方法。而且不清楚使用它是否比简单的foreach更好，因为您仍然在运行单线程的更难看的语法。

我不确定你试图用基于问题的索引信息做什么。然而，在c#中，你通常可以使用IEnumerable。Select方法从您想要的任何内容中获取索引。例如，我可以使用类似这样的方法来判断一个值是奇数还是偶数。

string[] names = { "one", "two", "three" };
var oddOrEvenByName = names
    .Select((name, index) => new KeyValuePair<string, int>(name, index % 2))
    .ToDictionary(kvp => kvp.Key, kvp => kvp.Value);

这将根据列表中的项是奇数(1)还是偶数(0)的名称为您提供一个字典。

除非你的集合可以通过某种方法返回对象的索引，否则唯一的方法就是使用像你的例子中那样的计数器。

然而，当使用索引时，唯一合理的答案是使用for循环。其他任何事情都会带来代码的复杂性，更不用说时间和空间的复杂性了。

我只是遇到了这个问题，但在我的情况下思考这个问题给出了最好的解决方案，与预期的解决方案无关。

It could be quite a common case, basically, I'm reading from one source list and creating objects based on them in a destination list, however, I have to check whether the source items are valid first and want to return the row of any error. At first-glance, I want to get the index into the enumerator of the object at the Current property, however, as I am copying these elements, I implicitly know the current index anyway from the current destination. Obviously it depends on your destination object, but for me it was a List, and most likely it will implement ICollection.

i.e.

var destinationList = new List<someObject>();
foreach (var item in itemList)
{
  var stringArray = item.Split(new char[] { ';', ',' }, StringSplitOptions.RemoveEmptyEntries);

  if (stringArray.Length != 2)
  {
    //use the destinationList Count property to give us the index into the stringArray list
    throw new Exception("Item at row " + (destinationList.Count + 1) + " has a problem.");
  }
  else
  {
    destinationList.Add(new someObject() { Prop1 = stringArray[0], Prop2 = stringArray[1]});
  }
}

我认为，虽然不总是适用，但常常足以值得一提。

不管怎样，关键是有时在你的逻辑中已经有了一个不明显的解决方案……